Mark's carb curve is actually just total.
I have been Primal-ish for about a month now and things have been going really well. I have some coworkers who are doing the Atkins diet. They use "Net Carbs" They subtract grams of fiber from the total carbohydrates in an item.
Can someone comment on whether or not Mark uses "Net Carbs" or "Total Carbs" when he is giving nutritional guidelines?
Mark's carb curve is actually just total.
Yep, PB is total.
I'm not sure about the net carbs thing myself. But then, my digestive system launches major protests to fiber, so I tend to avoid it.
As a rule of thumb, if you are eating whole foods, the net carbs are about a third less than total carbs. So 60 total carbs is 40 net carbs - if you are trying to compare your intake to that of your co-workers.
True Mark uses total while Artkins uses net. I question that last "rule of thumb" though. Veg sources of carbs vary too much in their fiber content to be simplified that way.
Also, subtracting fiber carbs from the total is not a bad idea but where the Atkins people lose my vote is in saying that all those weird sugar alcohols "don't count" toward your total carbs. That is cheating but it's a good marketing strategy for all those "low carb" bars and shakes.
Well-behaved women rarely make history : Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
My New Primal Journal : http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum...tml#post821642
My 1st Primal Journal (including travel journal of Africa) http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum...back-to-Africa
Thanks everyone! I guess I knew it was total carbs but wanted to verify. I did get some paleo bread out the the deal though. My co-worker ordered it and said it was too dense. I like it but it doesn't absorb butter very well. I might try some with my eggs in the morning.![]()
I find it useful to distinguish between different types of carbs as Paleobird does. I eat a lot of vegetables and tubers, so discounting the fiber content is useful for estimating my glucose (or glucose equivalent) intake.
I also discount fructose intake as carbs, as none of that is taken up by the muscles. So essentially I only count glucose and other carbs that are readily processed to glucose by the body.
F 5 ft 3. HW: 196 lbs. Primal SW (May 2011): 182 lbs (42% BF)... W June '12: 160 lbs (29% BF) (UK size 12, US size 8). GW: ~24% BF - have ditched the scales til I fit into a pair of UK size 10 bootcut jeans. Currently aligning towards 'The Perfect Health Diet' having swapped some fat for potatoes.
Yes, it is overly simplified. I think I read it in Eades in his discussion of carbohydrate "load" or whatever he calls it (CCM?). I think he realized his diet would appeal only to mathamatitions, so he gave some "short-cuts." But I've been playing around with the Atkins Meal Planner and it does kinda work out in practice (over the whole day of food).
It makes more sense than saying that veggies don't have carbs, imo...![]()